Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion of the defendant Cigpak, Inc., is denied, the judgment is reinstated, the plaintiff's motion to hold the defendant Cigpak, Inc., in contempt is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, to impose, an appropriate sanction on the defendant Cigpak, Inc., and to direct it to appear by an officer, director, shareholder, or agent for a deposition on a date certain.
The defendant Cigpak, Inc. (hereinafter Cigpak), was not entitled to vacatur of the judgment entered against it upon its default in answering since it failed to refute the prima facie evidence of the process server's affidavit that it was properly served on July 7, 1997, by personal service of process upon its president, the codefendant, Rashid Iqbal ( see, CPLR 311 N.Y.C.P.L.R. [a] [1]; 5015 [a]; Wieck v. Halpern, 255 A.D.2d 438; Simmons First Natl. Bank v. Mandracchia, 248 A.D.2d 375; Manhattan Sav. Bank v. Kohen, 231 A.D.2d 499).
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to hold Cigpak in contempt for its failure to submit to an examination of a judgment debtor since the "mere act of disobedience is sufficient to sustain a finding of civil contempt where, as here, the record reveals that such disobedience was calculated to or actually did defeat, impair, impede, or prejudice the plaintiff's rights" ( Yeshiva Tifferes Torah v. Kesher Intl. Trading Corp., 246 A.D.2d 538; see, Oppenheimer v. Oscar Shoes, 111 A.D.2d 28).
Cigpak's remaining arguments are either improperly raised for the first time on appeal or without merit.
Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.